My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12/12/1983 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1983
>
12/12/1983 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2014 1:41:02 PM
Creation date
10/10/2014 10:38:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
12/12/1983
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
144 <br />Council Meeting <br />December 12, 1983 <br />Question #3 is as follows: What are our policy limits as far as <br />the ceiling the insurance company will pay? - The limits of <br />liability under the City's insurance policy is $1,000,000 loss. <br />Punitive damages are excluded from coverage of the policy. The <br />lawsuit against the City seeks $500,000 punitive damages so the <br />ceiling the insurance company would pay would be $500,000. <br />Question #4 deals with the open meeting law and the Mayor felt this <br />City has abided with this law and the policy will not be changed. <br />Question #5) Felt there had been no problems in the past and did <br />not anticipate any in the future. <br />Mrs. Sorenson thanked Mayor Benson for his answers. <br />PCA REPORT ON THE STUDY DONE AT THE MOLIN CONCRETE PLANT <br />Mr. Schumacher requested Mr. DAvid Kelso of the PCA to present his <br />report to the Council on monitoring the noise level at that plant. <br />Mr. Kelso reported that he had monitored the noise level in three (3) <br />locations as noted by Mr. Schumacher on a map; 504 77th Street; 545 <br />Lilac and 7655 4th Avenue. At the first two locations, the noise <br />level was within the standards as set by PCA. However, the 4th Avenue <br />site was slightly above the standards. <br />Mayor Benson asked at what hour was the monitoring done? Mr. Kelson <br />said he was at the first site at 8:00 A.M.; the second site at 8:45 <br />A.M. and the third site at 9:40 A.M. <br />1 <br />Mayor Benson asked if this had been monitored at, say 6:00 A.M., would <br />the noise level have been higher? Mr. Kelso said it would probably <br />be but the noise level is not only monitored on the level of noise <br />but also on how long that noise level is maintained. <br />Mrs. Elsenpeter felt that an area North of the site should have been <br />monitored where the concentration of the residents are located and Mr. <br />Kelso said he monitored the nearest residents and any other homes <br />would only be less since they would be farther away. <br />Mr Reinert said he understood that at the present time there is no <br />problemm but there could be - is that correct? Mr. Kelso agreed. Mr. <br />Reinert suggested dealing with the 'could be'. He suggested that <br />some monitoring be done at the peak hours of the plant. <br />Mr. Kelso said he had no problem doing the monitoring at 6:00 A.M. but <br />there are few options: 1) do nothing; 2) limit the operation; 3) <br />order the erection of a barrier, which could be very expensive. Mr. <br />Kelso said a visiable barrier of vegation does virtully nothing in <br />regards to the noise. <br />Mayor Benson suggested taking the facts that are available, getting <br />a task force together, and perhaps working something out with the <br />owner of the plant. <br />Mr. Reinert moved to have Mr. Schumacher meet with the concerned <br />citizens and Mr. Molin and discuss this matter. Seconded by Mr. Marier. <br />Motion carried unanimously. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.